Category: Writing

Assignment Instructions
Goal: Demonstrate the ability to create a field of study project that uses both research-based and personal content while using presentation software to communicate with an intended audience.
Course Objective: CO3
Instructions:
During the first six-weeks you formulated a project plan, researched the content of the plan, and collected quality academic and non-academic sources. For the week 7 Field of Study Project you will create a PowerPoint presentation that builds upon the week 2 Project Plan and the week 4 Location and Access (Source Organization worksheet) that effectively communicates the knowledge you have gained during COMM110.
Please consider the following:
Presentation will include an introduction, body, conclusion, and properly formatted reference/work cited slide in the citation style of your degree program (APA, MLA, Chicago).
Clear evidence that the topic was researched and expanded upon the week 2 Project Plan.
Presentation provides audience with information to increase their knowledge of the topic presented.
Presentation engages the audience by using elements such as images, graphs, and charts. Appropriate citations must be included.
Three (3) vetted credible sources. One (1) of the sources must be scholarly and from the library.
Appropriate length 7-9 slides.
If you have multimedia skills and want to add creative content to your presentation, please do! Try to add any of the following enhancements and as you do, think about how it will impact your presentation and improve communication with the intended audience.
Voice narration, closed captioning, script.
Appropriate background music (must be cited on reference page).
Creative use of slide animations and transitions.
Attachments:
4925125_2_intro-to-the-research-paper.docx

2. Given the international movement towards International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), which favours a more judgement based versus rules-based approach to accounting which perspective (process or performance) and approach to measuring JDM quality do you believe would best serve the users of accounting information and why?
3. Do you believe that accounting practitioners would have a different perspective then accounting academics in terms of measuring JDM quality? Why or why not?
4. Looking specifically in terms of knowledge content and structure as described in Chapter 3 what JDM challenges relating to knowledge content and structure do you think are faced by the accounting profession? Are these challenges unique to the accounting profession? Why or why not? What recommendations could you make in terms of addressing these challenges?
There are some additional articles on the course site which may provide some other perspectives to consider when looking at how to measure JDM quality.
Assignment #2
:
The material in chapters 6 and 7 completes the portion of Bonner’s framework that identifies the three main factor categories which she believes accounts for differences in JDM quality. For this assignment I would like you to build upon the understanding of the framework to date in order to look in detail at a significant accounting scandal. In particular you should focus on the task and environmental variables described in the chapters.
For many of these scandals it is very easy to merely state that bad people did bad things but that may be an oversimplification. Many people were involved, many poor decisions were made and it would be helpful to see if there were patterns from which we can learn to hopefully reduce the likelihood of future similar scandals.
Required:
1. Briefly describe the company involved and the background of the scandal. What were the main issues involved?
2. Examine a recent major accounting scandal in terms of the task and environmental variables proposed by Bonner. The scandal should be large enough so that there is adequate publicly available information for you to examine. There is no shortage (unfortunately) of these types of scandals so you can select one within the last 10 years that is of interest to you. Here is a link with some possibilities you could consider: http://www.forbes.com/2002/07/25/accountingtracker.html
3. Not all of the variables suggested by Bonner will be applicable so you should identify the main ones you see as affecting the JDM quality which ultimately led to the scandal. If you feel there were other task or environmental factors which were present in the scandal you should identify them and their role.
4. Based upon your examination of the scandal, what recommendations would you make at a:
· Corporate level
· Regulatory/industry level
· Government level
You will want to consider sources outside of Bonner’s textbook in order to support your findings and conclusions.
Assignment #3
:
The material in the final three chapters:
address JDM from the perspective of third parties who rely upon the judgment of accounting professionals;
puts forward some suggestions for improving JDM;
suggests some research areas which could be pursued.
In Chapter 8, Bonner discusses the third party users of the judgements and decisions of accounting professionals and asks whether these users understand the factors that cause variation, that is high or low JDM. The list of third party users Bonner identifies includes:
Managers
Investors
Industry regulators
Government
Analysts
Loan Officers
Auditors
Bonner also proposes several theories which might offer insights into how third party users of accounting information might evaluate the quality of the information.
Required:
1. Discuss Bonner’s suggestion that third party users may use different approaches when evaluating the quality of the accounting information and the JDM behind the information. Do you agree with her suggestions? Why or why not?
2. Briefly evaluate the theories Bonner suggests may help understand how third party users evaluate the quality of the information. Do they make sense? Why or why not?
3. Using the company you analyzed in your last assignment discuss how the third party users involved assessed the JDM and the accounting information available to them. Were their approaches consistent with Bonner’s suggestions? Were there other approaches the third party users considered when evaluating the JDM and the information that was produced?
4. What, if any, are the implications to the producers of the accounting information if third party users have different approaches to evaluating JDM and the quality of the information?
5. Based upon your above analysis what recommendations would you make in terms of any changes to Bonner’s approach to how third party users evaluate the quality of accounting information and the JDM behind the information?